Join The Initiative to Amend
the US Constitution
State Nominating Primaries and Nationwide Popular Direct Election of the President SNaPNPeP
Symposium about State Nominating Primaries and Nationwide Popular Election of the President
The symposium is not an Article V procedure under the US Constitution. It is preliminary study and debate before initiating an amendment to the US Constitution to regulate US political parties.
The US Congress and the States have considered hundreds of proposals to change the way we elect our President rather than using the so-called “electoral college system.” See https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43824 I propose that “We the People” adopt the 28th amendment to the US Constitution to mend the Electoral College. It would allow us to nominate a Presidential Slate of the President and Vice-President through State parties in electoral districts; and to elect them by national direct popular vote.
We should set up an internet symposium about State Nominating Primaries and Nationwide Popular Election of the President. “Today not in secret but in constant public view, both men and women from electoral districts ought to consider changing the part of the Constitution relating to the choice of the President.” Who should consider a twenty-eighth amendment to the US Constitution and how would the participants be selected? Should the media participate? All fifty-five who took part in the 1787 convention had been involved with politics. Who would host and finance the Symposium?
There were fifty-five Delegates to the U S Constitutional Convention of 1787
Those founding fathers suggest ways to make the electoral college better. The “Spirits of those Fifty-five” remind us by quotes from Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton, Madison, and others. We discuss why, when, and how to host and finance a Symposium on
Who Should Be Participants in the Symposium
To Consider A Twenty-eighth Amendment to the US Constitution
Each US Senator and Congressman or Congresswoman could choose the participants from a list of recommended volunteers they invite to an informal (non-government) internet virtual symposium. In this case the organizers would have to obtain sponsorship and financing. Then through the virtual symposium, participants could consider and give their ideas digitally, explain them virtually, and with a suitable virtual event moderator they could consider and change their digital proposals. They would conclude and give their best report to the public within one year.
Many might say NEVER let the politicians select the study participants, because they are the ones who are keeping us in this mess. Would you ask the BAR ASSOCIATION of each of the States, the Chairpersons of the Politics and Government departments from the largest universities and colleges, or the CEO s of media companies (television, radio, cable, and newspapers)?
Note all fifty-five who took part in the 1787 convention had been involved with politics.
The selection of participants in this symposium is unique. Participation is related neither to the number of states nor to their populations. This was the conflict that in part contributed to the adoption of an Electoral College. Only fifty-five men participated in the 1787 Constitutional Convention. The number of participants in the proposed internet virtual symposium will be ten times greater than the 1787 Constitutional Convention. In this process California, with fifty-five electoral districts, would select fifty-five participants, a number of participants equal to the 1787 US Constitutional Convention. Rhode Island was the only state not to send delegates to the Constitutional Convention. It could register four participants for this symposium. In seven States and the District of Columbia, each can only register three participants. Their combined total would be less than either California, Texas, New York, or Florida.
In United States Presidential Election of 2020, a total of 154,600,000 million cast votes. The top 10 States cast 79,077,799 votes. Half the total votes is 77,300,000 votes. The other 40 States cast less than half. And 12.5% equals 19,325,000. The 23 least populous States and DC cast 20,936,874 votes or 13% of the total. Two States, California and Arizona totaled 20,888,207 votes cast.
Opening and Beginning the Symposium
I have not heard of any Parliamentarian-Moderator for an internet Symposium. I looked at the United Nations, US Senate and Roberts Rules?
Opening and beginning the symposium
Initial Bylaws
The temporary moderator and Presiding Officer of the symposium shall be the provisional member chosen from and by the provisional members of the California Caucus who shall be the Credentials Committee. The Credentials Committee shall review, verify, and accept or reject the names proposed to be a symposium member; and then certify the persons named as an official member of the symposium. After all member participants have been accepted, the Temporary Presiding Officer shall begin by common parliamentary practice and call for nominations, seconds, and election of the President of the Symposium. More than one half of all 588 members must be logged on and voting to conduct business. A majority of logged on and voting members may adopt business resolutions between the hours as follows:
9 am to 9 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 4,
8 am to 8 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 5 Eastern Time,
7 am to 7 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 6 Central Time,
6 am to 6 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 7 Mountain,
5 am to 5 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 8 Pacific Time, and
4 am to 4 pm in Universal Time Coordinated zone 9 Alaska Time Zone-Hawaii–Aleutian Time Zone.
If a vote is taken, it can be documented in two ways:
1. A recorded vote must be requested before the voting is conducted and the vote results must show each Member's electoral district.
2. The summary of the vote results shall show the number of votes for, against, abstaining, and non-voting; and shall not show a Member's electoral district.
The President of the Symposium shall calls for resolutions to be placed on the provisional agenda of the next regular session that may include:
(a) The President's first report on the work of the Symposium.
(b) Reports from any committees.
(c) All items the inclusion of which have been ordered at a previous session.
(d) All items proposed by the hosts, facilities, and financing agents.
(e) All items proposed by any Member of the Symposium.
(f) All items about the budget and the report on the accounts to date.
(g) All items which the President deems it necessary to put before the Symposium.
The proposer shall include an explanation of the basic documents or draft resolution of any item proposed for inclusion in the agenda.
Upon commencing each session, the Symposium shall approve the provisional agenda. The Symposium by a majority of the members logged in and voting may add items of an important and urgent character to the agenda. Unless Two-thirds majority of the members of the Symposium logged in and voting shall decide otherwise such added items may not be considered until seven days have elapsed and until a committee has reported upon them.
The President may limit the debate about adding an item to the agenda to three speakers in favor of, and three against it. The President may limit the time speakers under this rule.
The Symposium by a majority of the members logged in and voting may amend or remove items on the agenda.
NON-PARTISAN Campaign
More About When to Conduct the Symposium
And Subsequent NON-PARTISAN Campaign
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 lasted one long Summer, four months, or just one third of the year. It started on May 14, 1787, and ended on September 17, 1787.
The Symposium on how to improve the selection of our President may last more than twice as long.
IT WOULD BE BEST TO CONDUCT THE SYMPOSIUM THE YEAR AFTER the 2026 MID TERM CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS or 2027. THE CAMPAIGN TO ADOPT A 28TH AMENDMENT OUGHT TO OCCUR THE TWO YEARS FOLLOWING THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTiON 2028 or 2029 and 2030
The foregoing schedule if the amendment is adopted would allow a couple of years to arrange the 2032 Presidential Primaries of and 2032 Presidential Election
Whether formal or informal near Great Americans Day in the middle of January the Senators, Representatives and Governors would invite their voters to give by the first Tuesday in February 2027suggestions of those who should participate together with their acceptance to participate. By the end of March 2027 each requesting official would choose one from those recommended to take part in the internet symposium. The Symposium would begin in April 2027 and conclude its work on Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2027. It would file a report a month later back to the appointing representatives.
The symposium could use a virtual event application like Amazon Chime, Google Meet, or Microsoft Virtual Events.
Getting “men or women” of stature and qualifications to accept such a task will be extremely difficult. Immediately they will see they will be taking part in a PUBLIC symposium. The public may ignore their report. Detractors may ridicule them. The symposium may attract participants who aspire to be famous, who seek the most online admirers, who are zealous workers for their special interest group or who want adoration like Hollywood Stars for nine months.
Should The Fourth Estate Take Part in The Symposium?
YES, the media should take part in the Symposium. The Symposium will occur by the people in an internet social network system that has many difficulties controlling the ethics of truth.
There remains a notable gap online between the prevalence of democratic discourse and debate—which require only the open voicing of opinions and reasons, respectively—and the relative absence of democratic deliberation, which requires the joint exercise of collective intentions, cooperation and compromise as well as a shared sense of reality on which to act. The greatest moral challenges of our time—responding to the climate change crisis, developing sustainable patterns of economic and social life, managing global threats to public health—aren’t going to be solved by ideological warfare but by deliberative, coordinated exercise of public wisdom. Today’s social media platforms are great for cultivating the former; for the latter, not so much. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-social-networking/
The term Fourth Estate or fourth power refers to the press and news media both in explicit capacity of advocacy and implicit ability to frame political issues. They were active before, during, and after the US Constitutional Convention of 1787
According to the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Center for the Study of the American Constitution, Department of History, "Newspapers played a critical—perhaps a determining—role in ratifying the Constitution".
US Constitution First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Benjamin Franklin was a particularly important participant in the US Constitutional Convention of 1787, and he was from the "Fourth Estate".
The Heritage Foundation, info.heritage.org wrote, “The press, Franklin argues, unlike any other republican institution, has a power that does not fall under any constitutional check. It is motivated to act viciously by its very principle (created to attack dogma, false knowledge, and political corruption), though in practice it is neither limited nor moderated by either its own idealism or by any institution. While the press claims to rule like a court — passing all things before its judgment — it may rule tyrannically because it is liberated from considerations of justice or precedent. Thus unchecked, the press can subvert rational habits of mind among citizens and reverence for the law while flattering public resentments and antagonizing citizens' pride."
The” Fourth Estate” married the PARTIES in 1791.
SEE https://www.heritage.org/american-founders/commentary/franklin-and-the-free-press.
Hosting and Financing the Symposium
To Improve How We Choose Our President
What if neither the government nor its elected leaders choose to start a formal or informal symposium? How do “WE the PEOPLE” take this responsibility and opportunity that they shirked? Could the political sciences departments of our colleges and universities host and start this symposium?
A Consortium of Charitable foundations-America's most prestigious foundations is “our” best chance of a host to finance the initiative.
An outside chance is a Special Interest Group. Examples are AARP, NAACP, NRA, LWV, AMA, NCSL, USCC, NCC and AFL-CIO.
The Symposium Web Site might earn money to pay for the host, and to pay for its expenses? The consortium among America's most prestigious charitable foundations who finance and host the symposium might earn money for their charitable aims. They can accept donations using “Pay Pal” or They can sell Ad Space through Google “AdSense.” The Symposium would create substantial content like minutes of the proceedings, research documents, committee reports, observer commentaries and special reports from invited guest speakers. They can imitate news publishers and restrict access to the content to premium subscribers. Then, they can sell a paid preferred membership. They also can sell released published posts and media reviews. Their proceedings will generate information that Special Interest Groups will want to use. The SIGs might pay for an “Infolink” or pay to CHAT in their special interest conference or debate forum especially allowed to them.
Who is most qualified to assemble and to send the request to the Foundations? Not I, you say. Get another volunteer. Are there consultants who would make our pleas to the foundations? Yes. I googled the internet and found
https://thefundraisingauthority.com/grants/raising-money-from-foundations-1/
Google says there are Fundraising Consultants: Standout Firms for Any Need. See https://grantsplus.com/fundraising-consultants/
But where does the money come from to pay such consultants?
So, all I can do is ask all those foundations, please listen to us, get together and help us. “We the People" ask, would you please help us?
I mentioned earlier that I thought the best hope of starting an online internet Symposium on improving the Electoral College might hinge the willingness of a consortium of foundations to host and finance it. Consequently, I browsed foundations on the internet to find those that I thought would best fit this objective. I became dazzled, confused, and unable to focus upon the goal to host and finance it. For me it is like finding a four-leaf clover. I have never been good at it. Occasionally I have been Lucky. For me this became a random chaotic endeavor for which I desperately need help. I stopped at seven, that number the superstitious say might bring the luck I need. In no order I picked the following foundations:
Open Society Foundations
1730 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 7th Floor
Washington, DC 20006, United States
George Soros
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/contact
314 Lytton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301-1430
United States
chanzuckerberg.com/grants-ventures/grants + Contact Info
Mark Zuckerberg.
USPS address: PO Box 341886
Austin, TX, United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk
Ford Foundation.
https://www.fordfoundation.org/.
MacKenzie Scott
https://usagrantapplications.org/v9/c/
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Action After the Symposium
After the Symposium concludes and files its report back to their Representatives, what happens?
Will 2/3 of our US Congress or ¾ of our States initiate the adoption of an amendment to improve the election of our President? In the “Spirits of the Fifty-five” It should be a NON-PARTISAN initiative. There is a slight chance any such initiative would be successful. The 17th amendment providing for direct election of Senator passed in less than a year, the 19th amendment passed in fifteen months and the 21st amendment passed in less than a year. Both Congress and the States should stipulate that the proposal must pass within TWO years and should specify if it does not pass within two years then it is a failure. If it takes longer than two years it becomes a PARTISAN political gridlock which will make it a failure.
Previously I posted on January 15 as later edited "More About When to Conduct the Symposium and Subsequent NON-PARTISAN Campaign”, IT WOULD BE BEST TO CONDUCT THE SYMPOSIUM THE YEAR AFTER the 2026 MID TERM CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS or 2027. THE CAMPAIGN TO ADOPT A 28TH AMENDMENT OUGHT TO OCCUR THE TWO YEARS FOLLOWING THE PRESIDENTIAL Election 2028 or 2029 and 2030. The foregoing schedule if the States adopt the amendment would allow a couple of years to arrange the 2032 Presidential Primaries of and 2032 Presidential Election.
Of course, it is possible in Congress with swift and cooperative non-partisan spirit to cause the amendment to pass earlier. If Congress were to act in a non-partisan way, it would be an exceedingly rare occasion. But given a non-partisan action by Congress it would be possible for congress to pass a Joint Resolution calling for the adoption of the 28th amendment in early 2025, then the States could ratify it during the following year. And if the States ratified the amendment in 2026, then the States could use the newly adopted procedures for Presidential Primaries and Presidential Election in 2028.
What happens will depend upon the degree of consensus the Symposium reaches by a majority of its members and/or any alternate report approved by a substantial minority caucus.
The symposium may unanimously say, do NOTHING; or it may unanimously say, "WE The People" should adopt by the above procedure an amendment it recommends.
Are there secrets encrypted within the proposed 28th amendment? Cryptologists will find the claims of the numerologist and astrologist amusing. They will apply keys, the codes, and they will apply their cyphers but only Webster has the correct answers.
See the official government description of the process at https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution.
The Thirty-eighth Ratifier
The 28th amendment to the Constitution shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the States which is thirty-eight States.
The U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. Census Bureau in Table 2. RESIDENT POPULATION FOR THE 50 STATES, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND PUERTO RICO: 2020 CENSUS gave the total population of the United States as 334,735,135 persons. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/2020/data/apportionment/apportionment-2020-table02.pdf
The ten most populous States total 179,266,444:
California 39,538,223
Texas 29,145,505
Florida 21,538,187
New York 20,201,249
Pennsylvania 13,002,700
Illinois 12,812,508
Ohio 11,799,448
Georgia 10,711,908
North Carolina 10,439,388
Michigan 10,077,331
They are fifty-four percent (54%) of the population of the US.
New Jersey 9,288,994
Virginia 8,631,393
The twelve most populous States total 197,186,831 fifty-nine percent (59%) of the US population.
It is possible for the thirty-eight least populous States having only 41% of the US population could amend the constitution, but it more likely that the most populous States would be among the ratifying States.
Eleven of the twelve most populous States were among the thirty-eight States to ratify the 21st amendment. Also, the most populous States were among those ratifying the17th and 19th amendments.
The following 36 states ratified the 21st amendment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-first_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Those 36 States are likely to vote for the proposed 28th amendment. But two more would be needed to pass the amendment. Add the latest States Alaska and Hawaii. The twelve States most likely to vote against direct election of the President are: Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and Iowa.
New Hampshire or Arkansas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Tennessee are likely to be the 38th State to ratify the amendment.
Note Iowa with first in the Nation presidential caucuses and New Hampshire with the first in the Nation presidential primaries will object to losing their first in the nation status. They will resist having focused and fair timing with all State primaries held on the same day.
By having "focused and fair timing" on the same day at the same time in all primaries and all elections SNaP N PEP prevents a "lock'; and assures that all States take part equally in both primaries and national elections.
And We should place in our Constitution for “We the People” controls, protections, and "check and balances" upon parties.
Committees of Correspondence the First Patriots
The participants in the Symposium need to act like Colonial Committees of CORRESPONDENCE. They should correspond digitally with hundreds of their contacts.
And We should place in our Constitution for “We the People” controls, protections, and "check and balances" upon parties.
"The Committees of Correspondence were provisional governments formed by patriot leaders in the Thirteen American Colonies as a means of communicating with each other and their agents in Britain on the verge of the American Revolution. After first being established in Boston in 1764, Committees of Correspondence spread throughout the colonies, and by 1773, they served as “shadow governments,” seen by the people as having more power than the colonial legislatures and local British officials. The exchange of information between the committees built the patriots’ resolve and solidarity that encouraged the formation of the First Continental Congress in 1774 and the writing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. By the time America declared its independence in 1776, as many as 8,000 patriots served on colonial and local Committees of Correspondence." By Robert Longley Updated on October 14, 2020.
See https://www.thoughtco.com/committees-of-correspondence-definition-and-history-5082089
Those Patriots proved that the pen is mightier than the sword. And they proved they were mightier than the wealth of King George. 'Many of the delegates to the US Constitutional Convention of 1787 were members of the Committees of Correspondence.' The latter needs an appropriate citation.
In the 1760s, the Sons of Liberty used committees of correspondence to organize resistance to England. The most famous and influential committees of correspondence, however, operated in the 1770s. In this decade there were three consecutive systems of committees of correspondence: the Boston-Massachusetts system, the inter-colonial system, and the post-Coercive Acts system. Each system was organized and worked in slightly different ways.
The Virginia Committee of Correspondence was an eleven-man group formed by the House of Burgesses on March 12, 1773, in response to perceived threats to colonial charters and legislative authority resulting from the Gaspee affair. The burgesses ordered the Committee of Correspondence to write to other colonial legislatures with a request to share information about imperial legislation and any actions they might take in response. Colonial committees of correspondence previously had existed to facilitate transatlantic communication between the colonies and London, but the intent of the House of Burgesses was to create a permanent inter-colonial communication network that would be active in times of crisis and peace. In response to the request from the Virginia legislators, other colonial legislatures quickly agreed to form a network of committees of correspondence. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/the-virginia-committee-of-correspondence/